Albert Pujols' Injury Won't Have as Big of an Impact as You Think

Albert Pujols' Injury Won't Have as Big of an Impact as You Think

Albert Pujols, the best player in the game has been lost for 4-6 weeks with a fractured left forearm. The Cardinals are tied for first place with the Milwaukee Brewers, but without Pujols, they will have to scramble. Make no mistake, you cannot replace Albert Pujols, one of the greatest hitters in the history of the game, by going with someone who otherwise wasn’t starting for your team. The Cardinals will likely try to do so by moving Lance Berkman from his right field spot to first base, and by giving Jon Jay more at bats in place of Berkman in the outfield. (Jay has already seen extensive playing time since mid-May, particularly when Matt Holliday was out).

However, just because Albert Pujols cannot be singularly replaced to get the same production doesn’t mean it is the world ends. He is still, in this team sport with individual matchups, just one individual player amongst nine. Wins above Replacement (WAR) is a statistic that tries to encapsulate other measures to convert production to the amount of wins for which a player is responsible. According to Baseball-Reference, Pujols has been worth 25.9 wins above replacement over the previous three seasons — seasons that saw him win two MVP’s and finish 2nd in the other. That averages out to over 8 wins above replacement per season. If Pujols’ were to, say, miss 40 games, we would expect the Cardinals to do about 2 wins worse without him over that span using a replacement level player. And Jon Jay has, so far, been better than a replacement level player.

But that’s theoretical, and you may not buy that losing a player of Pujols’ ilk may be only worth 2 more losses over a quarter of the season. So what if we actually look at what happens when a team loses a superstar player of around the same age as Pujols? Using Baseball-Reference’s season finder, I looked back at history to find all other players who (1) had a WAR of 20.0 or better over a three year period from ages 27-29, 28-30, or 29-31, and (2) then missed 25 or more games the following season (at either age 30, 31, or 32). I then found the team’s record when they were starting, versus when they were out. Originally, I used all games in which the player participated, but realized the winning percentages were low when these star players came in the game as non-starters, because of selection bias–they more likely pinch hit when trailing.

Even removing those games, the results were interesting, and should provide some measure of hope for Cardinals fans. Only 17 players met the criteria, most of whom are memorialized in Cooperstown, names like Ruth and Mantle. For 9 of them–so just more than half–their teams actually had a better record in games they missed than games they started. Here is that full list:

As Starter

Playing Without

first

last

year

age

W

L

W

L

chase

utley

2010

31

68

46

0.596

29

18

0.617

carlos

beltran

2009

32

36

44

0.450

34

47

0.420

scott

rolen

2005

30

35

20

0.636

65

41

0.613

rickey

henderson

1991

32

64

62

0.508

17

11

0.607

allan

trammell

1989

31

46

73

0.387

13

28

0.317

gary

carter

1986

32

86

45

0.656

21

9

0.700

reggie

jackson

1976

30

74

57

0.565

11

17

0.393

frank

robinson

1967

31

61

67

0.477

14

18

0.438

mickey

mantle

1963

31

31

21

0.596

65

31

0.677

mickey

mantle

1962

30

74

43

0.632

22

17

0.564

duke

snider

1958

31

32

48

0.400

31

17

0.646

ted

williams

1950

31

46

40

0.535

46

19

0.708

lou

boudreau

1950

32

37

29

0.561

48

25

0.658

mel

ott

1939

30

59

56

0.513

16

10

0.615

luke

appling

1938

31

34

43

0.442

30

37

0.448

babe

ruth

1925

30

44

53

0.454

25

32

0.439

dave

bancroft

1923

32

68

39

0.636

27

19

0.587

Will the Cardinals join that list of teams that weathered the loss of a great player by playing just as well or better? I don’t know. Maybe Matt Holliday and Lance Berkman cool off, or the pitching staff goes through a rough patch and they lose more games than they win. If that happens, the easy answer, but probably not the entirely correct one, will be it is just because they lost their best player. History suggests that losing a star player doesn’t have to be costly for a stretch of games, and if the remaining Cardinals can play as they have so far in 2011, they can get through this and still be in good shape for a pennant run.

Comments

Always knew that guy sucked. Great hitter, but not a great baseball mind when he was in the field. Just couldn’t keep his head on straight.

/bad

http://twitter.com/SouvenirCity SouvenirCity

Good post. Not even a WAR fan but I liked it. I think that the biggest effect this will have is on Prince Fielder and how much someone will pay him next season.

This should also hamper Albert’s chances at any deal longer than 7 years.

arkbadger

the schedule is going to be the problem for the Cardinals in the coming month, combined with the loss of Pujols. Series with the Reds, Phillies, Dbags and Rays all coming up in the next 3 weeks. thankfully after that they have the Cubs, Mets, Pirates and Astros. .500 ball when Albert is gone should have them sitting ok.

Rusty

Albert Pujols’ Injury Won’t Have as Big of an Impact as You Think

No, that’s about what I thought.

That said, fuck the Cards.

BFFredo

They’ll still have enough sched left to make up any ground they drop with him gone. As arkbadger said, .500 ball while he’s out and they should be fine.

If Pujols’ were to, say, miss 40 games, we would expect the Cardinals to do about 2 wins worse without him over that span using a replacement level player.

Usually love your posts Lisk, but I think you’re misunderstanding WAR. It has nothing to do with team wins – it’s just a measure of your value over a replacement player at your position.

Broccoli Beef

Alan Trammell, legend among legends

He went to school in the B1G?

http://twitter.com/adamstbear St. Bear

WAR. It has nothing to do with team wins – it’s just a measure of your value over a replacement player at your position.

…in terms of wins.

http://twitter.com/ButtersBC ButtersBC

Usually love your posts Lisk, but I think you’re misunderstanding WAR. It has nothing to do with team wins – it’s just a measure of your value over a replacement player at your position

What do you think the “Wins” portion of the name means?

http://twitter.com/#!/ChiSportsGal sportsgal116

Fuck you, Albert Pujols, for killing the summer music thread!

Jason Lisk

Usually love your posts Lisk, but I think you’re misunderstanding WAR. It has nothing to do with team wins – it’s just a measure of your value over a replacement player at your position.

Setting aside how it is calculated, you are telling me that when a person has a WAR of 8.0, it doesn’t mean that removing that player (like say, with an injury) and inserting a replacement level player would result in 8 fewer wins over the course of 162 games? If that’s not what it means, then, yes, I am wrong. That would seem to be what wins above replacement is measuring.

cracker jack

Stat fight!

/throws printed out spreadsheet at Lisk
//Lisk gets a papercut

http://www.yodayoushouldask.com YYSA

Cubs bullpen disagree with you on this one

Free Kerry Wood!

http://i.imgur.com/6mQjo.gif VladimirCrouton

Wilson Betemit should be given a medal.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CreEuaS8QY jekyll

it’s just a measure of your value over a replacement player at your position

http://twitter.com/#!/ChiSportsGal sportsgal116

Stat fight!

This would be a great time for someone to link to that video of the two cartoons arguing over baseball stats in a robot voice.

http://mcbias.blogspot.com mcbias

Great research, Lisk, I’m starting to wonder if baseball is the sport where an individual star matters the least. I always thought it was football, but looking at those numbers, I’m starting to change my mind.

http://www.sportsherniablog.com Tim Ryan (TheSportsHernia)

Lisk vs. Curtis the Close Talker:

http://laugh-o.blogspot.com starkweather

Eventually I will make a comment debasing the NL Central and it will be available to delight all who comment and all who read the comments. Until such a time is readily apparent to me, however, I will keep my fingers from touching the hot button that is the NL Central (interpretation: two straight comments eaten, third time’s the charm?)